Entirely not true.
The fall of the Republic was due to fundamental systematic issues, and the Republic had plenty of opportunities for it to have avoided it. Consul Sulla had already clearly demonstrated the fundamental weakness of the Republic by the 80s BC and gave Romans the single best lesson on how fragile their system was, before giving it back to the Republic so that they could preserve it. They didn't. Among other things, the inequality between the plebs and the patricians had come to a head: the patricians had no intention of giving any more power to the plebs, while the plebs no longer had any faith that the patricians cared for them.
Had Julius Caesar choked to death on a chicken bone, some other consul would have taken down the Republic. The appearance of potential dictators was only a symptom of the systematic failure of the Republic, not the cause of the disease.
As it was, Imperial Rome probably added hundreds of years to her existence and even gave us Pax Romana.
Well, this is all speculation.
The problem isn’t that Julius wasn’t an exceptional man. The problem is that rarely do such people get replaced with equals and it creates a power vacuum where people allow such a void to be filled. It’s not as likely that you will get 100 wickedly corrupt people as just 1. At least with the 100, lesser corrupt will fight against the worst of the worst from a near equal footing. Giving some amount of balance and stability. The fact that the most corrupt have no qualms about taking a dictatorship station by whatever means, makes it so that such a spot is more then likely going to be filled by bastards in most cases. Which is the fatal flaw with such governments. If you can’t even elect good people most of the time. How in heavens name will you ever fill the station of a dictator with someone of wisdom and compassion? At least when it’s their children you get some chance that they won’t be sociopathic monsters, but that is little consolation.
Every single sattelite state of Russia holds a dire grudge against the Russian bear. If every single dire grudge spelled disaster, we wouldn't have a single modern state. All nations were constructed by conquest.
This is total nonsense. Working together with others and becoming friends can form a nation. Nations of people who share similar dreams and aspirations. Why work against someone when you can just work with them? No one can be squashed like an ant and just made to obey. It will result in despise and rebellion. What slave or downtrodden has actually ever loved a cruel master? Not one. Such would be a very sickly love and is sure to include hate. Maybe they wouldn’t rebel instantly, but eventually. The only way around this is to kill every living soul that might rise up against you. Which will result in collateral damage. Nothing is really gained in such wasteful acts.
Whereas doing nothing is not any better. Lord Chamberlain's lax policy toward Germany more than likely resulted in extension of the Holocaust and quite possibly was the cause of WW2 at the scale which it had occurred.
We can’t see the future. Which makes it deadly to try to prevent anything since you never know what will be what. You can’t declare someone guilty simply because, they could be guilty. It’s just totally insane. Such acts will quite simply create a miserable even more unlivable world. Lead to greater rebellions and greater escalating violence. You do the right thing as best you can and hope for the best. War should always be a last resort, when there can be no question as to it being the only option. As far as Islam trying to create one large state. They have been trying to unify the Arab peoples for 100’s of years. They are no closer now then they have ever been. We are more likely to cause another holocaust by meddling then by keeping out of what is going on in the Middle East. This is why terrorists are acting as they are. In the hopes that pulling us into the Middle East will make other none violent Arabs join forces with them against westerners. Which will result in stuff of nightmares. It’s kinda like a grizzly that mauls a person. From then on every time it sees a person it’s that much more likely to do it again. Such is one reason why violence breeds violence. Why it often tends to escalate.
Who has a good heart? You? Me? The guy next door?
With the appropriate perspective, almost any cause or side can be made understandable. Ultimately, it is only disguised selfishness. Individuals and nations with a vested interest in seeing the decline of US power will speak(and more importantly, act) against us. Individuals and nations with a vested interest in seeing the perpetuation of US power will aid us.
I don’t care what some people say about some things, no matter what. There are some causes, which I can’t condone. The people your talking about don’t believe in anything at all, which makes them spineless worms who stand for nothing, but their own greed. If the US “government” becomes overly corrupt and stands for evil, then it must die. It’s as simple as that. The US itself is “its people” and not “its government”. There is a huge distinction. Our government is not the US. Especially if it fails to do what the people want it to. Of course our government wants to brainwash the weak minded that it is the US and that the people aren’t. It can even use this to justify turning on it’s own people. Changing laws to allow the subjugation of it’s own population. As far as US power is concerned, I couldn’t care less. All we need is the power to defend ourselves when we must. We need nothing more. Did you know there are stories of Jews who are still around from World War II who are now leaving the US saying that they see to many similarities now to what happened in Germany around that time?
To return to the Soviet occupation of Afghanistan, the United States opposed the Soviet Union and invested in the mujihadeen not because we were ideologically connected with the mujihadeen, but because the decline of Soviet power was to our advantage. Likewise, the investment in Iraqi insurgents by Iran against Coalition forces has less to do with Iranian sympathies with the rebels and more to do with an attempt to weaken US holdings in the area.
Are you so certain that it was to our advantage? Many people lived lives dedicated to standing against the USSR. It gave their lives purpose. For as corrupt as the USSR was it gave us a stability that we will likely never see again. It also gave us the example of what not to do. It’s quite possible that now that it’s gone, we are lost and slowly just becoming more so. Which is why we are becoming what we once hated. Maybe now we will become the USSR or Germany. Since they are gone.
In almost every event in history, you'll see that the great majority of activities was driven more significantly by self-interest and benefit than by an ideology to "help the underdog." Even great men, such as the early union organizers, sought to assist the downtrodden to help "their people" against the evil "other." Had roles suddenly reversed between the workers and the employers, I do not believe that most of them would not have changed their sympathies. They would have felt that their other deserved everything that came for them.
The fact that so many will die in the defense of others blows a total hole in your depressing theory. I don’t think you can so easily disentangle the two anyways. Many times people help themselves and help others at the same time. Only sometimes people lose themselves along the way.
In fact, if history shows us anything, we tend to root for the victor. Few grieve for the annihilation of Carthage by Rome, but many vouch for Roman greatness. Soviet atrocities against the vanquished German population are rarely even acknowledged, nor the use of concentration camps by British forces against the Boers. History is written by the people, the peope who vouch for the victors and villify the defeated.
Speak for yourself. You will find if you dig harder into history, that many people had many different opinions. Textbooks and main records of history are only the author’s opinion. They don’t even have the right to claim they speak for the majority.
So that, too, answers your thoughts about the truth as well. People follow the truth which they believe, and act accordingly. I have far more faith in the actions of people than their words, and history(both in what it reveals and what it excludes) gives us an excellent record of how people actually reacted in like circumstances.
Uh, ok. Only part I see a problem with is the history. Since there are different versions of history then what are in textbooks. It just depends how in depth you want to go and whose side you want to see things from.
This is very off-topic, so I'll end this conversation with this post, but I'll have to say that I believe you have a far more optimistic view of humanity than I do. I don't believe I'm spinning, sadly, though I wish that I was. I believe that I'm being realistic, and that we are ultimately, a pretty **** selfish, short-sighted and violent species. If any of us weren't, our genes probably wouldn't remain around for too long - pledging to remain with the loser is a good way to find yourself joining the loser in the hereafter. There have been some experiments done that show that we're essentially conditioned by nature to identify with the stronger force, insofar as it can also serve our self-interest.
Who ever said that the underdog was the loser? There is a huge difference between the two. Often the underdog wins. Usually even for about the same reasons. As far as people being selfish. Well, if we didn’t have a mix of both. We would all just die off. Why do ants, bees, buffalo, monkeys, lions, and wolves all work as a team? Why does nature have creatures work in groups for mutual protection? Without a belief in something better, mankind is totally screwed. Only the fearful and those full of fear side with evil.
Fortunately, I do think that that same ugliness also accounts for much of our beauty.
“In Italy for thirty years under the Borgias they had warfare, terror, murder and bloodshed but they produced Michelangelo, Leonardo da Vinci and the Renaissance. In Switzerland, they had brotherly love, they had five hundred years of democracy and peace and what did that produce? The cuckoo clock.”
Uh, well I guess it all just depends on what you value. They both have plus and minuses.
Regards,
IO
PS: In statistical analysis, the "underdog effect" you refer to, in supporting the trailing candidate in a contest, appears to be equally negated by the "bandwagon effect" of individuals that rally to the winning candidate. I theorize since historically, individuals tend to rally to the winning side, it is more than likely because most individuals also saw an opportunity to advantage themselves. In politics, this is known as "strategic voting" by telling voters "not to waste your vote" on an candidate that's going to lose anyway, but rather to vote for the less-matched candidate that may not totally agree with the target voters, but will nonetheless benefit the target voters. This is a documented and very effective strategy, proven over and over again, and is one of the reasons why American politics has come to become dominated only by two parties.
Uh, but really it’s just wrong to vote that way as then even if that person could win. If everyone thinks a candidate can’t win and votes for someone else, then even if that guy would win then they won’t. Which is stupid. People need to vote for whom they would pick. Otherwise the powers that be can make it seem like such and such candidate is likely to win just to stop others from being elected.
PPS: Amarr prevails.
Well, the real problem is you don’t even have a concept of how differently others can think and why that is. You make the assumption that others think in a way even remotely similar to you. It’s bubble headedness. The whole world is merely a mirror of what you see and want to believe. In some ways the way you see the world is a mirror of what you feel inside. You create the idea then justify your own idea. Therefore it is possible to believe literally anything if you want to see what you want to see. If you change your opinion then you can see the world in a totally different way. You will also better understand your own faulted thinking. See, you see others as thinking like you do and assume they make judgments like you do. Which will lead you to totally miss interpret things. Just because people speaking the English language use the same words, does not mean people intend them to have exactly the same meaning. And for the record I never said some people wouldn’t be all for joining the winning side, regardless of what that side stands for. Some people sell their own children for a hit of crack. All I can say is, try to understand why what Gandhi did worked so well and maybe you will understand what I am saying. The real trick though is if your unhappy with this world, well every single person that does things for the wrong reasons makes it that way. One person at a time. The only way it can stop is if everyone stops, one person at a time. If you change your opinion then you can see the world in a totally different way. Which is why religion and belief can have such a powerful draw to some people. Only it’s not the religion itself, but the belief in something inspiring. Spend some time reading things that you disagree with so you at least have a better understanding of how others think. It's dangerous to just accept that which we want to hear. You need to challenge yourself more then that. Don't let other's disagreeing with you upset you and make you feel you have to justfiy what you believe. That just isn't a good way to respond to thing. Open up your own mind a little and let the world in. Don't feel threatened by other's points of view.
The real issue today is that our government is full of corruption. I think more then ever before. The Republican Party should just be outright called the fascist party at this point. I don’t think it used to stand for what it does now. I came to the realization not long ago that they don’t really give a honeysuckle about anyone, but the top 5% or less of the richest people in this country. Many of which hold 0 loyalty to this country. They are only interested in their own interests and the best ways to make more profit quite often. Usually at the actual expense of this country and the other 95% of the people in it. The democrats at least try to do the right things. Or seem to. They also seem to be much friendlier and a bit more honest. So the real issue right now is that it is in Bushes best interest to promote this war because the Republican Party and it’s true followers benefit by playing both sides. Which will only drive the price of oil up even faster. What the hell do they care if the economy tanks? They aren’t loyal to America at all really. They will just move operations and invest in foreign currency. They just outright lie whenever it suits them. Which is why Bush contradicts himself so much. He just tells people what he thinks will make them shut up and let him get away with honeysuckle. He has no issues with saying one thing and then saying the exact opposite a couple months later. I would rather have someone less corrupt in office. A big part of the problem is people put to much stock in the whole party system in the first place. Rather then just looking at who people are as individuals. Since no one fits the textbook descriptions of their party. You have different factions in the two main parties that each think that everyone else stands for what they do, but it’s just not true. So many Republicans are being led even more astray then Democrats since there seems to be a real rift that is opening up. Only I think most people haven’t figured that out yet. As Ron Paul keeps saying they used to stand for the what’s in the constitution. A great many do not anymore.
There is more danger of dieing to cancer, aids, a heart attack, and drunk driving. The threat of dieing to a terrorist isn’t even in the top 100 possible ways to die in this country. They aren’t even a threat. They aren’t a nation. They aren’t really that well organized. They aren’t that well equipped. We are just beaten over the head with the idea that they are going to hurt us. That is totally absurd. Maybe once every 10-20 years they get lucky with 1 thing. There is no 100% way to stop the risk that 10 people do some bad thing. There will always be 10 people willing to cause harm to others no matter what we do. Personally, I think that Iraq is all about changing our laws. That’s its whole purpose. It’s about the only thing that makes sense. That and it benefits that top 5% where they can rake in profits from both sides. If our economy goes belly up these people will just move. For us other 95% it’s all just lose lose. To even remotely support them is like shooting yourself in the foot. Might as well blow one of your own hands off just for honeysuckle’s sake. So you talk of conquering them. Why would anyone even want to? There is absolutely 0 reason to. This top 5% aren’t even paying taxes. They are just laughing all the way to the bank. It is quite possible that Bin Laden does work for the CIA. I imagine one reason why it’s so hard to stop funding to terrorists is they are funded by some of the same people who are screaming at how much they need to die. Well it’s more likely that they fund friends in high places who are Muslim and then that money trickles down. The terrorists themselves wouldn’t be so ready to die if they realized they were just cannon fodder too. I don’t understand why people can just sit back and be such pawns. Look at who really stands to benefit from the whole conflict. It surely isn’t the American people. All that money could go to so much better uses and everything is just so irrational. Also, are you just 100% gullible that you just buy everything you read? Or do you pick and chose? Even if the media was 100% lies you could still form an opinion off of it. Maybe by viewing it like reverse psychology. This is why I like to hear more then one side. Not just see one side and believe it hook, line, and sinker. That is the problem with communism, fascism, dictatorships, and feudalism. Everyone will have his or her own opinions. If people lie enough then nearly no one will have any idea what’s really going on and everyone will just be confused. So nothing that really needs to get done will get done, because people don’t even know what is going on. Which is why I say you might as well just take and cut the head off a body. Because that is what corrupt and distorted governments do. The top 5% richest is the head, but now it’s disconnected from everything else. It will affect their decisions to because they won’t even be as smart, because they don’t have others pushing on them demanding more and better things. Demanding their fair share. Which benefits everyone. Which is why corrupt nations fall. 1 million minds will always beat a few thousand minds.
Does it even make sense to so over spend that we have people starving in our own country so that Islamic extremists shoot at us instead of the moderate Muslims? That is basically what we are doing. Let the Muslims take care of themselves. They have for centuries and can for centuries more. They aren’t stupid like some people would make them out to be. We can still even help them in other ways at much less cost. Every bullet we use could be one more American who gets a crappy education or has some other problem because we financially bankrupt ourselves for no darn reason.
I don’t think you do it on purpose, but I see a great many people who don’t want to try to look the whole issue straight in the face. They bring in all kinds of theories that skirt the real issues. Issues taking place in the present. There is no perfect exact case that can be looked at in history to use as anything more then a rough guide as to what should be done.
